Want to ban student cellphone use in Kansas? Take a moment to look at yourself first.

Adults are quick to judge young people's cellphone use without carefully examining their own, writes Tara Wallace. (Getty Images)

Adults are often reactive when challenges arise.

In my work as a therapist, clients learn that reacting is still an action, but one that gives little attention to critical details while allowing intense emotion to lead the way. When children move through the world this way, we label it a “behavior problem.” When adults do the same, we call it a “crisis response.”

I don’t believe that distinction holds.

A true crisis requires a shared and thoughtful understanding of the primary issue, and more often than not, that understanding is missing. One of my clients has a word for what happens instead: mudding. There’s a lot of movement. Sometimes intense movement. But it isn’t always forward. Sometimes it’s sideways or backward, and it often leaves a mess without fixing anything.

Kansas Senate Bill 302 feels like mudding.

There is movement. Significant movement. The bill has the potential to create real disruption for school districts and students alike. But will it accomplish its stated goal of reducing “harm” to young people by removing electronic communication devices from Kansas schools? That depends entirely on who you ask and what harm we are actually willing to name.

In my practice, I have clear boundaries around the use of electronic devices during sessions, unless they support the therapeutic process. That policy exists because wellness looks different for different people. For some clients, healing includes electronic journaling, music, guided meditation, breathing apps, or even digital art and coloring.

I’ve also been introduced to tools by clients, resources that were working for them long before they showed up in my office. That is one reason I support the thoughtful use of electronic communication devices or cellphones.

What troubles me, and what clients consistently name, is not simply young people’s relationship with technology, but adults’ unwillingness to examine our own use of cellphones and social media.

There is little accountability for how adults use cellphones and social media to engage with others. When leaders, of countries, institutions, organizations and communities model harmful, unchecked behavior online, efforts to “fix” youth behavior ring hollow.

At best, it’s hypocritical. At worst, it’s harmful.

Real talk: Adults are some of the biggest hypocrites walking right now.

Maybe the issue isn’t electronic communication devices. Maybe it isn’t cellphones or social media at all. Maybe, just maybe, we have a behavior problem that cannot be legislated away. One that won’t improve until we learn how to treat one another with greater care, responsibility, and humanity.

And yes, that work starts with us.

In family therapy, I often tell people to “taste their words” before they speak. If someone said to you what you are about to say to someone else, how would it land? If it doesn’t taste good to you, it likely won’t taste good to the person receiving it. So don’t share it. Period. Season your words with intention, tone, and care so your message has a chance to be received and understood.

Understanding, by the way, does not require agreement. It reflects respect for another person’s position, even when you don’t share it.

Recently, I shared something using social media that did not land well. The immediate reaction, not response, made it clear the other person was not in a space to understand what was communicated. I had a choice: Defend my statement or clarify what I recognized as a miscommunication. I chose to clarify.

That moment reminded me of something we don’t talk about enough. The world of cellphones and social media moves faster than our nervous systems can regulate. Platforms change as quickly as we inhale and exhale. In that environment, there is little room to repair miscommunication in meaningful ways, especially when the only tool we rely on is the same platform where harm occurred.

Connection does not live solely on screens. Genuine communication requires relationship, presence and a shared willingness to seek balance, whatever the relationship may be.

Before we rush toward universal bans on electronic communication devices or social media, perhaps we should consider something far more challenging: a ban on divisiveness. A ban on cruelty. A ban on the normalization of harm, disengagement, and the absence of empathy.

If we are committed to improving the mental and emotional wellness of our youths, our response must come from a place of healing. A place that allows us to be human enough, and accountable enough, to recognize where we, as adults, are falling short.

Because no policy will ever replace what modeling, integrity, and care are meant to teach.

Tara D. Wallace is a licensed clinician and trauma therapist in Topeka. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.